One Cannot Long Remain So Absorbed In

What History Teaches Us Is That Man Does Not Change Arbitrarily; He Does Not Transform Himself At Will On Hearing The Voices Of Inspired Prophets. The Reason Is That All Change, In Colliding With The Inherited Institutions Of The Past, Is Inevitably Hard And Laborious; Consequently It Only Takes Place In Response To The Demands Of Necessity. For Change To Be Brought About It Is Not Enough That It Should Be Seen As Desirable; It Must Be The Product Of Changes Within The Whole Network Of Diverse Casual Relationships Which Then Determine The Situation Of Man.

Social Life Comes From A Double Source, The Likeness Of Consciences And The Division Of Social Labour.

At This Point, An Urgent Question Arises: [...] Is It Our Duty To Seek To Become A Thorough And Complete Human Being, One Quite Sufficient Unto Himself; Or, On The Contrary, To Be Only A Part Of A Whole, The Organ Of An Organism? Briefly, Is The Division Of Labor, At The Same Time That It Is A Law Of Nature, Also A Moral Rule Of Human Conduct; And, If It Has This Latter Character, Why And In What Degree?

While The State Becomes Inflated And Hypertrophied In Order To Obtain A Firm Enough Grip Upon Individuals, But Without Succeeding, The Latter, Without Mutual Relationships, Tumble Over One Another Like So Many Liquid Molecules, Encountering No Central Energy To Retain, Fix And Organize Them.

Man Could Not Live If He Were Entirely Impervious To Sadness. Many Sorrows Can Be Endured Only By Being Embraced, And The Pleasure Taken In Them Naturally Has A Somewhat Melancholy Character.